Imagine a Ride in the New Corvette C7
10-24-2011, 09:36 PM
#21
Le Mans Master
I think you're discounting the impact of direct injection. Other DI motors show torque and horsepower increases over their port-injected predecessors of equal displacement; I'd expect similar gains here. Higher compression made possible by DI, and maybe timing/lift variability, but still cam-in-block.
We'll probably have basic technology info along with torque and horsepower figures in 15 months, and gory details and power curves in 18.
.Jinx
We'll probably have basic technology info along with torque and horsepower figures in 15 months, and gory details and power curves in 18.
.Jinx
10-28-2011, 09:41 PM
#22
Safety Car
I think you're discounting the impact of direct injection. Other DI motors show torque and horsepower increases over their port-injected predecessors of equal displacement; I'd expect similar gains here. Higher compression made possible by DI, and maybe timing/lift variability, but still cam-in-block.
We'll probably have basic technology info along with torque and horsepower figures in 15 months, and gory details and power curves in 18.
.Jinx
We'll probably have basic technology info along with torque and horsepower figures in 15 months, and gory details and power curves in 18.
.Jinx
BTW if I get the numbers right, I want everyone on this board to give me the credit.
Also I want a 3 BHP spread, so anything from 467-473 counts.
10-28-2011, 11:08 PM
#23
Burning Brakes
Direct injection, more efficient combustion. I bet the new motor has a similar torque curve to the old one, i.e. same power over the same rev range.
For purely nostalgic reasons, I wish they could hit their targets with 5.4 liters, specifically 327 cubic inches. The bore and stroke probably wouldn't match days of yore, but hitting that displacement is good enough.
Forum vendors would wet themselves over all the badges they could sell.
.Jinx
For purely nostalgic reasons, I wish they could hit their targets with 5.4 liters, specifically 327 cubic inches. The bore and stroke probably wouldn't match days of yore, but hitting that displacement is good enough.
Forum vendors would wet themselves over all the badges they could sell.
.Jinx
10-29-2011, 09:46 AM
#25
Burning Brakes
Really? Who today buys a car based solely on engine displacement other than Mustang 5.0 lovers? They buy them for advertised power and potential. Marketing guys may think it is cool to put a 427 badge on a Corvette, or as you suggest a 327. But seriously, someone goes out and says I bought the car because of engine displacement? You are drinking the cool aid or something.
You either
A) work at GM
B) are in the union
C) only buy GM vehicles
D) only buy Chevy specifically (brand loyalist)
E) all of the ABOVE
You either
A) work at GM
B) are in the union
C) only buy GM vehicles
D) only buy Chevy specifically (brand loyalist)
E) all of the ABOVE
10-29-2011, 10:27 AM
#26
Le Mans Master
Based solely on engine displacement? Where did you pull that from? Certainly not anything I said. Sorry your whole indignant rant just fell apart; maybe don't rush so much to slam someone next time.
10-29-2011, 12:05 PM
#27
Burning Brakes
Does purely nostalgic by definition equate to old buyer? Forum vendors would wet themselves over selling the badges. Yes, to old guys reliving the 60's. That somehow a 20, 30, or 40 year old would actually care about the nostalgia of a Corvette having a 327 again and somehow that would draw in those buyers??
Just because I have a different opinion than you in regards to the lack of appeal to any young person that a 327CI engine would be something they would actually care about, does not make me have a looney wacky stance and slam someone.
I mean surely making a statement about someones viewpoint as "WRONG" was such a thoughtful and none demeaning, non slamming response.
10-29-2011, 12:34 PM
#28
Le Mans Master
"No one south of 45 will give a hoot about that number."
I know that this is factually incorrect. It's as simple as that, friend. Maybe you should be more open-minded.
This board is rife with people who were too young to remember particular Corvettes first-hand, but that doesn't stop them from knowing the story and wanting the car. (How old were you when your 72 rolled off the line in St Louis?) Are young people who don't care about Corvettes going to get misty-eyed over a particular displacement? No, but it's not for them. There are some under-50s who already get it. In appealing to new buyers, GM doesn't have to throw out everything in Corvette's history. Indeed, little nods to the past help maintain the car's mystique.
But please, don't let anything get in the way of your single-minded opinionating. You wouldn't be nearly as entertaining.
.Jinx
I know that this is factually incorrect. It's as simple as that, friend. Maybe you should be more open-minded.
This board is rife with people who were too young to remember particular Corvettes first-hand, but that doesn't stop them from knowing the story and wanting the car. (How old were you when your 72 rolled off the line in St Louis?) Are young people who don't care about Corvettes going to get misty-eyed over a particular displacement? No, but it's not for them. There are some under-50s who already get it. In appealing to new buyers, GM doesn't have to throw out everything in Corvette's history. Indeed, little nods to the past help maintain the car's mystique.
But please, don't let anything get in the way of your single-minded opinionating. You wouldn't be nearly as entertaining.
.Jinx
10-29-2011, 02:19 PM
#29
Drifting
As a 25-year-old Corvette owner, and the son of a Corvette owner who had a '64 with a 327, I have to say I would be excited to own a modern 327. That'd be awesome, and I'd definitely have to let Dad drive it too.
